US Airways Will Not Take Delivery of CRJ-705 Aircraft; Mesa Airlines to Operate CRJ-700 as US Airway

[Bluestreak]

If US Airways is now buying aircraft for Mesa, I think I will puke. It doesn''t make sense to have Mesa operate the the 705s. PSA has contracts in place with its labor groups that pay the same as Mesa. Plus, we will already have maintance and training set up for the CRJ 200. It''s only differences training to put a pilot in the 705. Placing the 705s at Mesa will save U no money and U will be losing a percentage of the profits to Mesa and its stock holders.

 

[ISP]

Please understand folks that 705''s aren''t going to Mesa, but 700''s. US can''t place 705''s at the WO''s because ALPA won''t let them, but clearly the 700''s should be going to MDA.

 

[LavMan]

All the unions should take the company to court, using our concessions and the 5% to buy MESA jets, this is ludicrous.

 

[LavMan]

Bluestreak, read my previous post, US Airways spokesman even say US is paying for them.

 

[Bluestreak]

I just read another press release on Yahoo Finance (sorry, I don''t know how top post a link from this page). This release said US Airways would not take delivery of the CRJ 705, but would instead contract Mesa to operate an additionsl 25 CRJ 700s under US Airways colors. I interpret that to mean Mesa is paying for the aircraft not US Airways. Is that just wishfull thinking? Does it even matter? Mesa will probably own U in a few years anyhow.

 

[Furloughedagain]

Dont feel alone. The mainline MEC also screwed the furloughed mainline pilots -- 20% of their own seniority list.

Dont want you folks to feel like you''re alone.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

----------------
On 7/9/2003 6:31:27 PM Hope777 wrote:

Maybe it is time for the ALPA represented pilots at the WO to file a lawsuit against the union similar to the one Comair pilots filed and won.

----------------​

If what everyone is saying is true, and the company is BUYING these jets for Mesa, then then WO pilots should sue the company, not ALPA. What kind of scope protection is in the WO pilot contract? That''s the only thing that MIGHT save you.

 

[passed_over]

Oh Bluestreak how right you are. The mainline MEC in there wisest wisdom once again screw the WO pilots. It has been a drama that has been goin on for years and years. It continues to amaze me that Airways would continue to put their eggs in the MESA basket. anothe wholly owned pilot group screwed again by the mainline MEC

 

[WO/drone]

Now it REALLY looks like the lunatics are running the assylum. That is ALPA mainline saying how what and when, are they capable of deciding how the airline will work? There are enough lost jobs already, add 2000 at ALG, like number at PDT and a little less at PSA. And the associated loss in othe sectors and the available passengers, yes I mean paying decrease too. Madness. WE all took cuts to help the airline survive, be part of the solution. Yours can be the next job lost.

 

[WO/drone]

----------------
On 7/9/2003 11:07:37 PM sdavis29 wrote:

----------------
On 7/9/2003 1020 PM WO/drone wrote:

Now it REALLY looks like the lunatics are running the assylum. That is ALPA mainline saying how what and when, are they capable of deciding how the airline will work? There are enough lost jobs already, add 2000 at ALG, like number at PDT and a little less at PSA. And the associated loss in othe sectors and the available passengers, yes I mean paying decrease too. Madness. WE all took cuts to help the airline survive, be part of the solution. Yours can be the next job lost.

----------------​

maybe it should be renamed ALPAAIRWAYS....

we have senoirity and 279 a/c...



----------------​

Your killing me! ALPAAIRWAYS! and its their sandbox and bucket, look out for the neighborhood cats!

 

[sdavis29]

----------------
On 7/9/2003 1020 PM WO/drone wrote:

Now it REALLY looks like the lunatics are running the assylum. That is ALPA mainline saying how what and when, are they capable of deciding how the airline will work? There are enough lost jobs already, add 2000 at ALG, like number at PDT and a little less at PSA. And the associated loss in othe sectors and the available passengers, yes I mean paying decrease too. Madness. WE all took cuts to help the airline survive, be part of the solution. Yours can be the next job lost.

----------------​

maybe it should be renamed ALPAAIRWAYS....

we have senoirity and 279 a/c...

 

[Bluestreak]

Bob,

I agree with most of your post. Management has the ALPA dinosaur wrapped in a tight box. Have you seen the T-Rex bones in PIT? I think Dave had those put there the day U entered bankrupcy. He and Johny O. laugh about it while they smoke cubans in Crystal City.

How do you figure putting the 70 seaters at Mesa is a good business decision? PSA could operate these aircraft as cheaply as Mesa and all the profits would stay inside U.

 

[lownslow]

----------------
On 7/9/2003 8:32:21 PM LavMan wrote:


Bluestreak, read my previous post, US Airways spokesman even say US is paying for them.

----------------​

Of course, everyone should realize a few clear details - US Airways does not have anywhere near the cash to pay for these aircraft outright. They''re not taking the employee concessions and directly buying aircraft. What they will be doing is paying a loan off on these aircraft. Then Mesa will be operating these aircraft, but you''d better believe that they''re not getting them for free (if they were, then the managers deciding this would deserve to be relegated to flipping burgers for life). Mesa should be forced to pay a lease fee to US Airways to "sublease" these aircraft. This fee should be equal to or higher than that US Airways (through a greater line of available credit) had been able to get. The net effect should be a wash to US Airways'' bottom line, if not a small profit.

 

[LavMan]

Bob, I guess you would love to see the feudal system back in full or would you just prefer slavery?

 

[USA320Pilot]

Lavman,

The Mesa LOI does not provide information on how the aircraft will be financed, but reports indicate the financing will be done by GECAS. For US to finance aircraft for Mesa and then attempt to operate 50% of the pilot seats by Mesa employees, this would constitute a "Wet Lease", which would be another violation of ALPA''s contract.

In the May 27 letter from Jerry Glass to Bill Pollock, the company said it would not violate the ALPA contract in regard to the CRJ-705.

Finally, I ws just wondering, can you show me where it says the 5% pay deferral is buying the RJs? I seemed to miss that point in my research.

Best regards,

Chip